RE: On proposals
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
that's true enough, thank you, but does that invalidate my point?
0
0
0.000
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
that's true enough, thank you, but does that invalidate my point?
No, that one:
still stands, except it's not nobody, but it's not everybody either.
let's hope the mood improves 🙂
And that's to be expected. What if people decided they'd like to take 20 million dollars. It doesn't matter what their post says. As long as they have enough support, they'd get it. So, instead of allowing people to rob us, we have the return proposal.
Everyone is welcome to vote for the return proposal. Some might be saying, "Yes, I'd like to see this bar raised," and that's it.
That does not prevent anyone from receiving funding. They simply need to get over the bar. The vote for the return proposal doesn't always mean, "No." Future proposals have not been published yet so it's impossible to say no to those, for example.
In the case of SPL, the bar was set at 29m HP the day it went live. Today the bar is set at 29m HP. So even if people did say, "No" to SPL by utilizing the return proposal (people are welcome to say no here), it's still the same goal they had when they started.
At any moment, anyone currently supporting a proposal can remove their vote. That could lead to the loss of funding. Anyone participating knows this. It's the life they signed up for. It is what it is.
Wasn't meant to be easy. It's as flexible as it needs to be. Notice someone spending the money on drugs and vacations instead of what's outlined in the proposal, there are several ways to put a stop to it.
This part isn't true. People are talking about this stuff nonstop.
This next part hardly ties in to what you said previously
And it's proven more than 20 participate. Also, Hive is more than social media. SPL is a game, for example.
And I don't understand how altering the DHF would make the social media experience somehow different. Or maybe your wording has me confused.
Other than that, I hope you're well.
it all seems terribly inefficient and deeply unprofessional to me. sorry.
I never said it was perfect. You're welcome to come up with a better solution.
like the witnesses would vote for that, lol.
i watxhed dan talking about hive in the making of freechain video and how it should be open and welcoming.
i wonder how he thinks it is going?
Ask him.
I personally think it's impossible to control all temperaments. All cities on the planet want to be open and welcoming. Good luck, society.
I stiil think proposals need more thorough vetting and management and hive is being less resonsible than would be optimal about how the dhf is used.
I would agree some proposals get talked about a lot; the "let's buy a car" one was popular!
Yes, more than 20 might particpate, but unless a certain 20 do, forget it.
Sircork's return post is worth a read, I think you'd agree?
I am indeed well, thank you, and hope you are too!
Thanks
I'm not defending all this spending. I'm not interested in having a President or group oversee the process either. That would result in 1 or 20 controlling it.
This doesn't mean that more than 20 control. The level of their control is determined by the weight of their stake, and to imply that all participants exercise equal control of the DHF is disingenuous. Some votes are more powerful than others, and some few votes exert more control than >99% of votes. Whether that's 20 or more, or fewer, has not been established.
If 20 more participants vote for the return proposal, and 20 more participants vote for the SPL proposal for example, that means 40 more people are attempting to control the DHF. That's on top of the thousands already involved and the thousands more that could be involved.
Not all large stakeholders vote "yes" for everything in the same way not all those with less HP agree on all things at all times.
I never once said all have equal say. Their say goes into the pile, tallied up, and there's your result. The results can be observed, as we speak.
So, your reply wasn't responsive to the statement that the DHF is controlled by '20 or so people', but regarding attempts by the relatively stakeless to exert control they didn't have the stake to do.
Got it.
You're twisting my words.
Got it.
The reality is, I'm coming from a place where I firmly believe in strength in numbers. Thousands of people with HP can participate. A community with common interests like SPL for example has a clear advantage. Problem is, they don't participate. And that is a choice they're making. Not a flaw in design.
Thousands with 100HP each turns into a big number. On the individual level, it's extremely inexpensive to double the size of that big number.
If the spending is out of hand, thousands of people have the ability to put a stop to it, as we speak.
Also, I'm coming from a place where I realize the door is wide open, and billions of people could potentially be participating. I'm not viewing the entire picture known as Hive from within the bubble.
As of this writing and using SPL as an example. If one or two more participants with large stacks step up in support of that proposal and that's enough to push it into approved status, that does not mean those individuals were responsible for the decision. They're simply added to the pile of 800 participants. It all adds up. That one sitting there with 10 HP could be enough to push a proposal into approved status. And if this system was running at its full potential, that particular proposal would have thousands of smaller votes backing it.
The reality is that a couple dozen whales outweigh all the minnows and dolphins on the platform. You mentioned that not all the whales are on the same page, but that's even more true for the myriad people with myriad levels of interest in a variety of features, and not enough stake to push anything against even one whale without a thousand other people that happen to agree with their stance close enough to back them up.
Taking down the bidbots was something that generated a lot of agreement, but that's pretty egregious, and the backroom shenanigans ongoing at the highly staked tables are pretty opaque. Such broad agreement to counter shady and covert dealmaking is vanishingly unlikely, and they know that. Folks that can put their $.02 in see no reason to bother unless they can jump on a bandwagon or get one rolling - for some reason that matters to them enough.
It takes a lot of outrage before much happens, although plenty of folks do bother to have their vote on such matters. I do, for example, and hundreds of others too. But it doesn't take much to make our little minnow and dolphin votes worthless.
It can seem that way.
Also, if you look closely at the SPL proposal for example, you'll see (as of this writing) 813 in control. If you're using Peakd, on the proposals page, you can see the entire breakdown. All voters and HP levels. Just click where it says "Vote value 27,070,001.565HP" (as of this writing). It helps to scroll all the way down so it all loads properly.
27m HP. They still have plenty of incentive to increase that number, as their opposition dwindles.
Return proposal. 652 in control. Current HP slightly above 30 million. Much of that 27m HP probably won't be touching that return proposal, so that pile's out.
People powering down while being in support of SPL, acting like a, support leak. Someone has to fill that hole so more participants might step up. Meanwhile daily rewards roll in pushing the value up. So that's several more contributing, indirectly.
Not a closed shop. Wide open. Come join the party. They'll be advertising this shit for weeks and weeks to a sizeable community. Many are still unaware. More organic support incoming for sure.
Since day one, I have always been against this idea that the accounts with a low level of HP are worthless. Those individuals are not small. The dehumanizing nature of these words like minnow and whale. Pardon my language but that really fucks with peoples heads. They need to know they contributed to that 27m HP up there. Deserve the credit, as a group, regardless of HP level, equally. This is why you never see me subscribing to the idea those with high levels of HP call all the shots. I don't want people walking in here feeling small, by default, due to the culture. They call their shots, I call mine, you can call yours. It's all the same and adds up.
I will always sit here and show them they mean something. And I started with nothing. I've worn those shoes. Knew my own worth as a man and that HP number means nothing, since day one.
You've twisted my words and said I'm being disingenuous.
I took some flak a few months back for this:
https://inleo.io/threads/view/nonameslefttouse/re-leothreads-2ja2szhqx
64m HP at the time of writing shared between "dolphins" and "orcas". Plenty of potential participants there. Enough to push a proposal through.
Took some flak on the day that SPL proposal went live after suggesting, in so many words, Splinterlands try to pull this off organically.
It is, how can I put this gently... unfortunate someone there went around pulling strings and pushing buttons behind the scenes like that. Throwing a wrench in the works. Seeing no value in the actual community and instead trying to play chess with votes and people. Used the word "swayed" and somehow forgot the pendulum comes back.
I still think my suggestion is, a better idea.
It's fine if people disagree with me. A guy gets used to that after awhile.
Finally this place grows a pair and says enough is enough with posts like marky's here. I'm sure you've seen the show and I noticed you and I end up a lot of the same parties.
This looks bad, but it's good.
What else...
We can do better. It's possible. This whole DHF system is like trying to find order out of chaos but eventually all these falling apples turn themselves into a pie somehow like it's magic or some shit and it takes a fuck of a lot more than 20 people to do that.
Returned my vote to the return proposal once again, like hitting reset button since that's where it was before all this SPL shit started. Not touching it, like I said on day one. Moving on.
Sorry for wasting your time with this response. ;)
And no hard feelings, of course.
Ciao
Substantive statements aren't ever a waste of time - unless their recipient doesn't read them, but that's on the recipient, not the speaker.
Look. I agree 'it takes a fuck of a lot more than 20 people' to create functional society. That's the fundamental reason I detest plutocracy, both overt, as on Hive, and covert, as democracies. I know that myriad things have vastly more value to humans individually and severally than money. That fact is why it's so shocking to hear Mike Tyson saying that Don King would sell his momma for a dollar.
What magic you refer to in falling apples transforming into a pie is an apt description of the expectation of minnows and dolphins voting on DHF proposals mattering, when one whale vote outweighs the whole assembly of them. Apples falling turns into a mess that has to be cleaned up IRL. In the fall when I'm out hunting innawoods, I lurk abandoned apple orchards pioneers in the area planted when homesteading, because everything I hunt loves the apples. Black bears hoover up the fallen apples and shit them out hardly digested, leaving piles of what very much looks like apple pie filling - but is absolutely piles of shit.
Reality isn't what we wish it was. Wishing doesn't make it so. Systems designed to produce desirable results are what makes things so, what transforms apples into pie, instead of piles of shit.
That's why I propose above changing how the DHF is spent, so that only the relative portion of the fund to a Hive users stake is disbursed for proposals that user voted for and passed, while such portion of the DHF fund apportioned to non-voters for such proposal are not disbursed for proposals they do not vote for, and are available to be disbursed only on proposals that pass they do vote for. I believe that would encourage people to be more attentive to the functionality of proposals, to the accounting and returns detailed in proposals, because they'd not be able to vote to spend from the funds apportioned in the DHF to other users, but only funds apportioned to themselves that they would spend down by voting for proposals. Instead of just magically spending other people's money, they'd be spending their own (or it would feel like spending their own money, despite it not being anything they earned, created, or owned).
Prudence is fundamentally important to economic success, and that sense of responsibility I expect to be invoked by this means would cause most people to exercise more prudence in considering DHF proposals, which would require grant seekers to provide accounting details in their proposals. That may not change relative power between the substantively staked and those less so, but I reckon it would dramatically change the discussion by changing how people looked at the DHF funds.
A bientot.
Just want you to know I read this. Also, it's the weekend and sitting in the comment section under a post isn't something I wanted to be doing, but here I am.
Some families destroy themselves, arguing over money.
Lottery winners. What's going on there? All it takes is five years and they're worse off than they were before they bought that ticket. That win gave them the biggest rush of their life. So they buy the fast car nobody else has, get the rush again but not as intense. Start handing out money to friends and family, feeding off that good time energy. Always chasing that initial rush through reckless endeavors until it's impossible to feel good about anything. Might have a little bit left but they're permanently miserable with a life full of regrets.
People ask for funding, it gets approved, and they think it's a win.
Several backing it feel like, winners.
I know where this leads...
Strange because I don't feel like a loser when the things I disagree with get funding. In the same way I'm happy for others when they succeed.
I look around and see a lot of complaining (an endless stream and can even be seen above) about all that money being wasted. All while they're utilizing several products all funded by the DHF, just to get those words out.
A clear indication it's all taken for granted.
I don't really have anything to add to your thoughts and I know changing the actual system is easier said than done, so I don't want to invest time coming up with a new plan in a comment section with you.
People are more than welcome to come up with a better solution. I've always been the type who'll repurpose tools. Right now I don't see nearly enough participation. The knife won't cut. Why? Because we're using the dull side.
So before I'd ever get behind a total makeover, I'd at least like to see this thing running at its full potential (or as close to it as possible). You insist they're powerless and will just get smashed, regardless. I will disagree with that mindset, forever.
Thing is, doesn't matter how much HP one owns here. Everyone wins some, and loses some. All on the same playing field with equal opportunity.